The past, and the present

There is a saying that the past is a foreign country.  Especially in a dynamic society like the United States, the passage of 30 – 40 years has made for so many changes that our country, while recognizable to our forebears, can seem as different as if it were a foreign land.  That includes the physical landscape of town and country, as well as interests, behaviors, values and beliefs — culture in the broadest sense of the word, including our political culture.

While the game of politics has become highly partisan and divisive, the political parties’ foreign and domestic policies tend to be more idealistic than they used to be, less harsh and punitive, tending to the conciliatory and therapeutic.  At the same time, there is an inclination among our leaders to search for quick and easy solutions that cut across the tragic realities of life in a way that would have astonished previous generations, and has tested — and tested to destruction — the law of unintended consequences.

In domestic politics, cultural Marxism is ascendant.  We have a welfare system that still promotes single motherhood; an education system that focuses more on "self-esteem" than thinking or the acquisition of knowledge; and an often mindless environmentalism that stifles reasonable economic growth.

Our approach to foreign challenges has changed as well and would be equally unrecognizable to our ancestors.  As in domestic affairs, there is too often a blindness to consequences, a wishful thinking about human nature, and the same refusal to pay the price for maintaining our civilization.

What to previous generations would be obvious threats requiring hard but necessary steps to counter are treated with a lack of seriousness.   We want our cake, and we want to eat it, too: to shop ‘til we drop and then forego the bills.

The U.S. is fat and rich, and we can probably survive our sloppiness in domestic affairs, but mistakes in foreign policy are another story entirely.  Outside of 9/11 we haven’t paid a large price — a large price yet, in this era of WMD — let alone the ultimate price of our civilization seriously wounded or even destroyed.  But while we have survived foreign challenges in the past, even after the stumbling beginnings typical of democracies, those we face today are of a new and possibly more dangerous kind and raise a question as to whether the United States of 2008 still has the right stuff.  

Consider our response to threats then . . . and now:

Challenge: Setbacks in War . . . .

Then: In 1862, Union General Ambrose Burnside leads a disastrous frontal assault on Confederate positions at Fredericksburg; over 12,000 casualties; even so, another assault is attempted at Chancellorsville fewer than six months later, this time led by General Hooker, that results in more than 18,000 Union casualties; the North begins drafting troops two months later as it redoubles effort.

Now: In Iraq, American combat deaths are totaling approximately 800 a year; opposition leadership in Congress says the war is lost and calls for withdrawal of troops; the fiscal 2008 defense appropriations bill includes $2 million for brown tree snake interdiction in Hawaii and $3 million to provide "learning facilities and educational programs that promote character development and life-enhancing values through the game of golf."

Challenge: Media response to war . . . .

Then: In 1917, the American press largely supports U.S. efforts in World War I; respects President and military leaders and helps to rally public opinion; relatively little media opposition after we enter war.

Now: Large segments of U.S. media oppose Iraq War; emphasizes American atrocities and setbacks; rarely reports positive news and in many cases seeks to remain "neutral" as between U.S. and our enemies; 36 year old Lara Logan reports from Baghdad as CBS News "Chief Foreign Correspondent."

Challenge: Unprovoked attack on the United States with thousands dead . . . .

Then: In 1941, the U.S. declares war on Japan and Germany and wages relentless war; at its height, war consumes close to 40% of GDP; rationing; over 12 million serve; Germany and Japan defeated four years later.

Now: Following second World Trade Center attack; small all-volunteer army invades Afghanistan; U.S. spends less than 4% of GDP on defense; few people personally know a serviceman; war continues six years late; some "allies" send force of one (1) troop or refuse to fight at night.

Challenge: Irregular "fighters" make war on U.S. . . .

Then: In 1942 eight Nazi saboteurs land in the U.S.; rounded up by the FBI before doing any damage; trial before a Military Commission; six executed as spies within two months of arrival.

Now: Al Qaida- and Taliban-affiliated irregulars captured in Afghanistan fighting without uniforms; sent to Guantanamo; human rights campaigners and the media take up their cause; international pressure forces some to be released; "torture" consists of prisoners being forced to keep company with American lawyers.

Challenge: Foreign power threatens U.S. . . .

Then: In 1952, responding to Korean War and Soviet threat, the U.S. begins massive military build-up; spends over 13% of GDP on military; U.S. tests first hydrogen bomb; President Kennedy would later vow to "pay any price, bear any burden" and go to brink of war over nuclear weapons in Cuba.

Now: Iranian President Ahmadinejad taunts U.S. and threatens an ally with destruction; Iranian President pushes forward program to become nuclear power; U.S. intelligence services undermine efforts to counter Iranian threat; President attacked by U.S. media as warmonger — President Bush, that is.

The point is that up to thirty or forty years ago, the United States was a tougher and more serious society.  Today, even as threats have escalated, we have become less willing to defend our interests at the same time we are more constrained from doing so.  

Given the universe of possible consequences, so far we’ve been lucky; and unlike in Europe, there remains a substantial body of Americans who — when sufficiently provoked — are still willing to respond in earnest; but that’s becoming more and more difficult, as our political and military decision-making is increasingly hampered by lurking lawyers, political correctness and opposition to military action, per se, by elements of the media and the left, and even by some befuddled conservatives.  

The United States is a profoundly resourceful society with an ability to weather even serious setbacks.  But our resilience is not infinite, and the question remains as to whether our moral resources and intellectual clarity have been degraded to the point that we are vulnerable as never before.   Would our approach to the world in 2008 be foreign to a Truman or an Eisenhower, to a Henry Jackson?  

We are being weighed in the balance.